# In the matter of Sunil Tandon Vs. Union of India & Anr. W.P.(C) 10645-2021 & CM APPL. 32831-2021 (stay)

> HC judgment dated 2021-10-22. Citation: TCN-2021-HC-00013. The case involves a writ petition filed by Sunil Tandon, an erstwhile independent Non-Executive…

- **Court:** HC
- **Order date:** 22 Oct 2021
- **Citation:** TCN-2021-HC-00013
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/high-courts-chandigarh-bench/sunil-tandon-vs-union-of-india-anr-wp-cf3e154c

## Summary

### Background

The case involves a writ petition filed by Sunil Tandon, an erstwhile independent Non-Executive Director of respondent no.3 company, challenging an order dated 08.07.2021 and a letter dated 16.07.2021 issued by respondent no.1. These actions included the filing of C.P. No. 295/MB/2021 before the NCLT, Mumbai Bench. The respondent no.3 company is part of the Videocon Industries Ltd. group, which was undergoing corporate insolvency resolution process (CIRP) before the NCLT, Mumbai Bench. The petitioner argues that the NCLT, Mumbai Bench lacked jurisdiction to entertain the petition under Section 241(2) of the Companies Act, 2013, as only the Principal Bench at New Delhi has exclusive jurisdiction for such matters filed by the Central Government.

## Facts

Sunil Tandon, the petitioner, was an independent Non-Executive Director in respondent no.3 company until 18.05.2018. Respondent no.3 is part of the Videocon Industries Ltd. group. Videocon Industries Ltd. was admitted under the IBC Framework and subjected to CIRP before the NCLT, Mumbai Bench, on 31.08.2018. The NCLT, Mumbai, consolidated the insolvency process of all Videocon group companies on 08.08.2019. Twin Star Technologies Ltd.'s resolution plan was approved by the NCLT, Mumbai Bench, on 08.06.2021, but the NCLAT stayed the order on 19.07.2021. The Supreme Court dismissed appeals against the NCLAT order on 13.08.2021. Respondent no.1 passed an Impugned Order on 08.07.2021, directing the SFIO to investigate Videocon Industries Ltd. and its group companies.

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the NCLT, Mumbai Bench, had jurisdiction to entertain a petition under Section 241(2) of …

**Ratio:** The proviso to Section 241(2) of the Companies Act, 2013, stipulates that only the

…

**Reasoning:** The petitioner argued that the proviso to Section 241(2) is an 'ouster clause' that

…

**Interpretation:** The interpretation of the proviso to Section 241(2) is crucial in determining

…

**Application:** The court did not apply the ratio directly, as it refrained from interpreting

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Rekha P…
- **Appellants:** Sunil T…
- **Respondents:** Videocon Industrie…; Union of…

## Timeline

- **2018-05-18 — Petitioner's Re…**: Sunil Tandon resigned as a…
- **2018-08-31 — CIRP Commen…**: CIRP commenced against respondent…

---

This is a preview. The full structured summary, issues, precedents and source judgment are available on CaseEase - Legal Intelligence Simplified: https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/high-courts-chandigarh-bench/sunil-tandon-vs-union-of-india-anr-wp-cf3e154c